[11u] RFR: jnf_removal, series of patches

Tue May 18 12:12:53 UTC 2021

 Hello Martin, thanks for checking this.

Just in case, what do you mean by "Please make sure to push the 11 commits with the correct bug IDs in the commit messages for each of them. We need to keep track of all backported changes.» ?
in the patches I have sent you, it has 11 different commits, anything wrong with them there ?

I have a plan to push 11 separate commits in one push command, so history is kept good and little chance anyone will be building incomplete job (without some bugfixes for jnf removal).

Regards, Vladimir

> 18 мая 2021 г., в 15:07, Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com> написал(а):
> 
> Hi Vladimir,
> 
> thanks for doing all the work. I’ve reviewed your changes.
> 
> JDK-8257858
> 1_ - Applies almost clean, few gmk files had different filename and few copyright year issues, context difference in gmk files
> All good.
> 
> JDK-8257853
> 2_ - Not clean, most of issues were in CPrinterJob and JavaAccessibility due to changes in jdk12+. Rest was mostly context code difference.
> This one is tough but looks good.
> 
> JDK-8259343
> 3_ - Clean, only gmk file renames were needed
> Good.
> 
> JDK-8259651
> 4_ - Not clean, have to remove some changes to parts which are missing in jdk11: CMenuBar: ActivateDefaultMenuBar, Accessebility: titleChanged, getMultiClickTime
> Makes sense. Looks good.
> 
> JDK-8259869
> 5_ - Almost Clean, slight Context code difference in CGLLayer.h
> Good.
> 
> JDK-8260616
> 6_ - not clean, Missing CommonTextAccessibility.m in jdk11. Some Context code difference.
> Right. Good.
> 
> Please make sure to push the 11 commits with the correct bug IDs in the commit messages for each of them. We need to keep track of all backported changes.
> 
> Best regards,
> Martin
> 
> 
> Von: Vladimir Kempik <vkempik at azul.com <mailto:vkempik at azul.com>>
> Datum: Montag, 17. Mai 2021 um 17:51
> An: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com <mailto:martin.doerr at sap.com>>
> Cc: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net <mailto:jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
> Betreff: Re: [11u] RFR: jnf_removal, series of patches
> 
> Hello Martin
> Here they are http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/jnf_removal_11u/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/jnf_removal_11u/>
> Was applying cleanly about a month ago
> Slight rebasing might be needed, but it’s trivial
> 
> Regards, Vladimir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 17 мая 2021 г., в 16:09, Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com <mailto:martin.doerr at sap.com>> написал(а):
> 
> Hi Vladimir,
> 
> do you have individual patches?
> I’ve spent some time reviewing the files, but it’s often hard to find from which original sources they came from.
> I don’t necessarily need individual webrevs, but it would help a lot to have individual patches uploaded.
> 
> Please note that NSApplicationAWT.m needs to get rebased, but it’s trivial to resolve.
> 
> Best regards,
> Martin
> 
> 
> Von: Vladimir Kempik <vkempik at azul.com <mailto:vkempik at azul.com>>
> Datum: Donnerstag, 13. Mai 2021 um 12:37
> An: Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com <mailto:martin.doerr at sap.com>>
> Cc: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net <mailto:jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
> Betreff: Re: [11u] RFR: jnf_removal, series of patches
> 
> Thanks for response Martin
> Looking forward to it
> 
> 
> 12 мая 2021 г., в 18:04, Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com <mailto:martin.doerr at sap.com>> написал(а):
> 
> Hi Vladimir,
> 
> sorry for the long delay. There are currently many 11u backports and too few reviewers working on them.
> I have started to look at your changes, but it may take some more time.
> 
> Best regards,
> Martin
> 
> 
> Von: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net <mailto:jdk-updates-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net>> im Auftrag von Vladimir Kempik <vkempik at azul.com <mailto:vkempik at azul.com>>
> Datum: Freitag, 23. April 2021 um 09:38
> An: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net <mailto:jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net>>
> Betreff: Re: [11u] RFR: jnf_removal, series of patches
> 
> Hello
> can I get a review for this please?
> or if current format of webrev is not good - a suggestion for improving it.
> 
> Thanks in advance, Valdimir.
> 
> > 16 апр. 2021 г., в 15:43, Vladimir Kempik <vkempik at azul.com <mailto:vkempik at azul.com>> написал(а):
> >
> > Tier2 testing is good as well.
> >
> >> 16 апр. 2021 г., в 15:12, Vladimir Kempik <vkempik at azul.com <mailto:vkempik at azul.com>> написал(а):
> >>
> >> The collated webrev:
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/jnf_removal/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/jnf_removal/webrev.01/> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/jnf_removal/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/jnf_removal/webrev.01/>>
> >>
> >> Testing - tier1, will soon update on tier2.
> >>
> >>> 16 апр. 2021 г., в 14:39, Vladimir Kempik <vkempik at azul.com <mailto:vkempik at azul.com>> написал(а):
> >>>
> >>> Hello
> >>> Please review this backport of 11 patches from jdk17 to jdk11, they remove dependendy on JavaNativeFoundation.framework on macos
> >>> It’s 7 original patches fo jnf removal and 4 postmortem items to fix bugs.
> >>> I have created one collated webrev for 11 changesets, please let me know if it’s not the best way to do it.
> >>> Brief summary for backports:
> >>> 1_8257858 & 8257860 - Applies almost clean, few gmk files had different filename and few copyright year issues, context difference in gmk files.
> >>> 2_8257853 - Not clean, most of issues were in CPrinterJob and JavaAccessibility due to changes in jdk12+. Rest was mostly context code difference.
> >>> 3_8259343 - Clean, only gmk files renames were needed
> >>> 4_8259651 - Not clean, have to remove some changes to parts which are missing in jdk11: CMenuBar: ActivateDefaultMenuBar, Accessebility: titleChanged, getMultiClickTime
> >>> 5_8259869 - Almost Clean, slight Context code difference in CGLLayer.h
> >>> 6_8260616 & 8259729 - not clean, Missing CommonTextAccessibility.m in jdk11. Some Context code difference. Two changes in one patch to not break the build
> >>> 7_8257988 - Clean
> >>> 8_8259232 - clean
> >>> 9_8259585 - clean
> >>> 10_8261198 - Clean
> >>> 11_8263846 - clean
> >>>
> >>> So I need review for patches #1 #2 #4 #5 #6 and maybe (not sure) #3
> >>>
> >>> #1 the bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8257858 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8257858>
> >>> Original changeset - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/4a8b5c16 <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/4a8b5c16>
> >>>
> >>> #2 the bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8257853 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8257853>
> >>> Original changeset - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/fa50877c <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/fa50877c>
> >>>
> >>> #3 the bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259343 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259343>
> >>> Original changeset - https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/d6a2105b <https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/d6a2105b>
> >>>
> >>> #4 the bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259651 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259651>
> >>> Original changeset - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/5855d52a <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/5855d52a>
> >>>
> >>> #5 the bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259869 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259869>
> >>> Original changeset - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/92c2f084 <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/92c2f084>
> >>>
> >>> #6 the bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8260616 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8260616>
> >>> Original changeset - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/8760688d <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/8760688d>
> >>>
> >>> Regards, Vladimir
> >>>
> >>
> >
> 